Descripción y caracterización de las variables para el análisis

To explore the gap in the literature and the problem described in the previous section, this study addresses the following research questions:

1. To what extent do middle level principals’ parent involvement practices compare to Epstein’s exemplary practices in the typology?

2. To what extent do middle level principals’ parent involvement practices align to Epsteins’s six parent involvement categories: parenting, communicating, volunteering, learning at home, decision-making, and collaborating with community?

3. How do middle level principals parent involvement practices vary by years of experience, years leading at current school, gender, percentage of free and/or reduced meals within the school student population, and the geographical location of the school?

3.4 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This study used a quantitative survey to collect data. The survey used in this study is reflective in nature and requires middle level principals to make meaning of their own experiences as well as their own self-efficacy; therefore, constructivist epistemology shaped this study. Mertens and Wilson (2012) explained a constructivist views reality through reflection and upon experiences and interactions with others. The answers given by principals required them to reflect on their own personal experiences. Although constructivism is traditionally not associated with

The survey used in this study, Measure of School, Family, and Community Partnership (Epstein et al., 2002) is based on Epstein’s typology for parent involvement which served as the framework for this study. Epstein granted the researcher permission to modify the Measure of School, Family, and Community Partnership survey to collect data based on current practices, specifically the use of technology. Parent involvement practices assist in bringing together or separating schools, family, and community in support of a child. Therefore, studying middle level principals’ practices of parent involvement can assist in building a strong school community, which leads to student success.

Epstein (2011) framed her typologies from three perspectives of practitioners regarding family and school relations:

1. Separate responsibilities of family and schools assume there is incompatibility, competition, and conflict between families (teachers and parents).

2. Shared responsibilities of families and school emphasize the coordination and cooperation of teachers and parents and encourage communication and collaboration. 3. Sequential responsibilities of families and school emphasize the contributions parents and

teachers play in the critical stages of child development.

Epstein (2011) explained there are also mechanisms for building family and school relations and “these mechanisms serve as motivation to remove or reinforce boundaries between schools and families” (p. 27).

Partnerships between home and school have changed over time. The church and community once controlled hiring of teachers and development of curriculum. Now, the hiring of teachers is done by professional staff within a school system and states mandate curriculum. Trends like working mothers, childcare at an earlier age, federal regulations, and changing

family structures have also contributed to changes in the home and school relationship (Epstein, 2011). Epstein’s model depicted in Figure 5 (also Figure 3) visually represents school and family relations’ ability to thrive regardless of ongoing changes. The spheres indicate that parent involvement can increase due to practices of teachers, administrators, students, and parents. School and family actions or interactions can include or exclude parent involvement.

Figure 5. School, family, community creating overlapping spheres of influence

Epstein (2011) wrote, “The theory of overlapping spheres of influence posits that students learn more when parents, educators, and others in the community work together to guide and support student learning and development” (p. 43). This theory created the opportunity for researchers to think in new ways about family and community involvement in the educational process. To further detail how family, school, and community can be involved together to support a child, Epstein created a framework that included six types of parent involvement: parenting, communicating, volunteering, learning at home, decision making, and collaborating with the community (Epstein, 1995, 2001). This research study utilized Epstein’s framework to determine middle level principals’ practices of parent involvement.

3.5 RESEARCH DESIGN

This research study is quantitative in design. Many of the studies focusing on parent involvement in the literature were conducted using parent and/or teacher samples; few had principals as respondents. Therefore, this study focused on middle level principals’ practices of parent involvement. Babbie (2013) stated that surveys can be used for descriptive, explanatory, or exploratory purposes. This study is exploratory in nature due to the lack of existing research on this topic. The population being surveyed, middle school principals, would be too large to observe individually. In addition, middle school principals’ practices of parent involvement may be difficult to observe, and it would be costly to travel to various regions in Pennsylvania to observe multiple middle level principals. Therefore, conducting a survey allowed the researcher to collect original data from a large population that otherwise could be difficult to observe (Babbie, 2013).

3.5.1 Survey Design

The determination to use an existing survey was partly based on a pilot study that was conducted in 2013. After getting permission from two school districts in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, parent and teacher data were collected as part of the pilot study. Questions about parent involvement were given to teachers and parents based on Epstein’s typology. The data collected allowed the researcher to determine the quality of the questions in order to revise the survey as needed. Respondents did not answer questions regarding involvement practices. Teachers and parents were asked to review questions and determine clarity. Participant feedback indicated they

understood Epstein’s typology and could relate to the six categories of involvement. This pilot could have led to the development of a survey to administer to parents and/or teachers.

However, after conducting a thorough literature review, the importance of parent involvement became clear. The decrease of parent involvement at the secondary level was also evident. It also became apparent that parents and teachers were often studied. Findings also indicated teachers were not always aware of appropriate ways to involve parents into the educational process, especially at the secondary level. In addition, principals were identified as key people to assist in involving parents into the educational process, but studies of practices of parent involvement by secondary principals were lacking. Having great interest in middle level education and experience as a middle level teacher and administrator, the researcher focused on studying principals’ parent involvement practices at the middle level. Since there are various types of parent involvement, especially depending on the socio-economics, size, location, and grade configuration of the school, it was determined that Epstein’s typology and survey was a reliable way to collect data.

An existing survey, Measure of School Family and Community Partnership (Epstein et al., 2002), was developed to measure how a school is reaching out to involve parents (Appendix B). Permission was granted by the developers of this survey to the research to use or adapt this survey to meet the needs of the current study (Appendix A). Survey questions were adapted in order to pose the survey to middle level principals rather than the original participants, who were most often parents and/or teachers. The matrix indicates use of questions from the original survey (Appendix C). It also provides reason as to why some questions were not used or adapted. Some of the questions from the original survey were omitted or adapted for several reasons

manner, addressing current trends in education such as use of technology and websites, and considering participants would be middle school principals. Epstein’s research and typology frames the survey questions and is noted in the matrix, but additional research is noted when adapting questions. The final survey collected middle level principals’ practices of parent involvement in a concise manner while addressing current educational practice (Appendix D).

A second pilot study of the proposed survey was completed in November of 2016 which was two months before the final survey was administered. The survey was given to seven current or retired middle level assistant principals in order to determine effectiveness of the survey items. Assistant principals have a strong understanding of the questions asked in the survey but are not included in the sample. This feedback led to a few revisions including defining the multiple choice responses as well as making the boxes for open-ended responses in the demographic questions larger. The data collected in this pilot was appropriate and able to answer the research questions. These corrections were made before administering the final survey.

Qualtrics Survey System accessed through the University of Pittsburgh was used to administer the survey. Administering the survey in a web-based manner allowed for a large sample to be accessed quickly (Birnbaum, 2004). Babbie (2013) stated, in recent years online surveys appear to be comparable in response rates to that of mail surveys, and online surveys are cost effective.

3.5.2 Survey Sampling

The Pennsylvania Association for Middle Level Education (PAMLE) is an organization that was established in 1975 under the name of Western Pennsylvania League of Middle Schools. Several

the organization changed to Pennsylvania Middle School Association. The establishment of this organization promoted the general improvement of middle level education for students. Exploration within middle level education was promoted, and a forum for middle level educators was created allowing educators to discuss best practices. PAMLE focuses on educators working with students ages 10 to 15 and in grades 5–9 regardless of the grade configurations of the schools that house them. The current name, Pennsylvania Association for Middle Level Educators (PAMLE), reflects the ability to share best practices among teachers and principals (PAMLE, 2015).

In addition, PAMLE has embraced the work of Donald H. Eichhorn whose doctoral study provided evidence that youth between 10 and 15 years of age have unique physical characteristics. Eichhorn developed a framework for the middle school that is widely practiced. His work and model led to a prestigious award for middle schools, “Schools to Watch.” Criteria for the award include the ability for a school community to address academic excellence, developmental responsiveness, social equity, and organizational structures and processes. Since 2006, 34 middle schools in Pennsylvania have been named Schools to Watch (PAMLE, 2015).

PAMLE encourages best practices at the middle level. This study aims to gather data about middle school principals’ current parent involvement practices. Therefore, it seemed appropriate to ask for permission to survey members of PAMLE. Permission was granted by Leonard Ference, Executive Director of PAMLE (Appendix E). A list of members in the Western Region was provided in order to survey middle school principals who either have an individual or an institutional (through the district) membership. The Western Region of PAMLE includes the entire southwest corner of the state of Pennsylvania including Allegheny, Beaver,

Greene, and Washington counties, and also outer borders of Lawrence, Armstrong, Butler, Indiana, Westmoreland, and Fayette counties.

The list provided by PAMLE identified 34 active members who are current middle level principals. Because of the small sample the survey was expanded to all middle level principals working in the Western Region as identified by PAMLE who work in any 5 through 9 grade configuration and who work with students age ranges of 10-15. Principals leading a junior/senior high school or leading a school including grade 4 were not included. To gain a more robust sampling, middle level principals who work in a district who are members of Tri-State Area School Study Council were also included in the sampling. Tri-State Area School Study Council helps leaders stay focused on the rapidly changing administrative, legal, and instructional issues of K-12 education. Therefore, it is appropriate to include the expertise of middle level principals associated with this organization. Table 3 indicates the breakdown of middle school principals asked to be participants which totals 115. In addition, 18 of the schools identified in Table 3 have been named Schools to Watch since 2006. There were several school districts that span two counties. The middle school location determined the identified county.

Table 3. Middle schools in western region with middle school principals as participants

County Number of Districts Number of Middle Schools PAMLE

Allegheny 42 39 19 Armstrong 8 3 0 Beaver 15 11 4 Butler 9 9 3 Fayette 8 8 0 Greene 5 2 1 Indiana 11 0 0 Lawrence 9 2 1 Washington 15 13 3 Westmoreland 19 20 3

Tri-State Area Study Council N/A 8 0

Total 141 115 34

Of the 115 participants invited to complete the survey, 55 responded to the survey which was 48.7% (n=55). There were 43 male and 12 female middle school principals who completed the survey.

3.5.3 Data Collection

Members of the Pennsylvania Association for Middle Level Educators (PAMLE) in the Western Region, middle level principals who lead a school in the Western Region and middle level principals who work in a district who have membership to the Tri-State Area School Study Council received an introduction letter via email inviting them to take part in the survey and stating PAMLE is in support of the research study. The letter initiated a full understanding of the study, assured confidentiality to respondents, detailed the time commitment, and provided a link to the survey (Appendix G). Mertens (2010) recommended sending a follow-up letter (email) to ensure a high response rate (Appendix H). A three week window was allotted for completion of the survey. A follow-up email was sent after the first, second, and third week.

3.6 DATA ANALYSIS

Research data for this study was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Stata 14 software available through the University of Pittsburgh was used to examine the data collected. Descriptive statistics, specifically the measures of central tendency (mean, median, and standard deviation), is best used to describe characteristics of a sample or the relationship between

findings based on sample observations for a larger population (Babbie, 2013). Specifically, t- Tests and Pearson’s r Correlation will be used to make inferences from the collected data.

The data collected were analyzed by examining overall responses per research question. Each question represents a practice with a parenting category. The survey format identifies the questions respondents are answering per each parenting category. A breakdown of data analysis per parenting category is provided in Table 4.

Table 4. Data analysis

Research Question Survey Item Analysis

1. To what extent do middle level principals’ parent involvement practices compare to Epstein’s exemplary practices in the typology?

Items analyzed in independently to get the mean average 3-7 (Parenting) 8-14 (Communicating) 15-19 (Volunteering) 20-24 (Learn at Home) 25-29 (Decision Making) 30-34 (Collaborate with Community) Descriptive Statistics  Mean  Median  Standard Deviation  Frequency

Each question within the typology will be summarized in table format to compare

distribution and measure of central tendency per individual question. This allows for more in-depth understandings of how individual practices contribute to overall involvement. 2. To what extent do

middle level principals’ parent involvement practices align to Epstein’s six

parent involvement categories: parenting, communicating, volunteering, learning at home, decision-making, and collaborating with community? Items analyzed by practices in typology 3-7 (Parenting) 8-14 (Communicating) 15-19 (Volunteering) 20-24 (Learn at Home) 25-29 (Decision Making) 30-34 (Collaborate with Community) Descriptive Statistics  Mean  Median  Standard Deviation  Frequency

Data will be analyzed by taking the mean average from respondents’ scores in each of the six

parenting categories in order to calculate measure of central tendency. This allows for descriptive comparison of various practices among middle level principals’ per each

parenting category.

3. How do middle level principals’ parent involvement practices vary by years of experience, years leading at current school, gender, percentage of free and/or reduced meals within the school student population, and the geographical location of the school? Items analyzed 1 (Consent) 2 (Consent) 35 (Years of exp.) 36 (Current positon) 37 (Gender)

38 (Free and reduced lunch %)

39 (Geographical location of the school)

Inferential Statistics  T-test

 Pearson’s r Correlations Data will be analyzed to determine if respondents’ scores significantly vary based on years of experience, years leading at current school, gender, free and/or reduced lunches, and the geographical location of the school. The data will be analyzed to determine determine relationships between the listed

The data analysis addressed the research questions and determined practices regarding parent involvement at the middle level. This information can better assist middle level principals in developing involvement practices and/or strengthening current practices based on Epstein’s typology.

4.0 FINDINGS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to gain insight about middle level principals’ practices of parent involvement. The literature review indicated that attendance, academic achievement, behavior, attitude, and mental health of children improve when parents are involved in the educational process (Comer & Hayes, 1991; Epstein, 2008; Hornby & Lafaele, 2011). Much of the reviewed literature gave a perspective as to why parents may not get involved largely due to teacher practices. However, a principal’s leadership influences the involvement of parents, because it is the school leader who successfully implements parent programs and provides a positive school climate that invites parents to become involved (Dornbusch & Ritter, 1988; Griffith 2001; Richardson, 2009). Therefore, this study attempted to address the gap in the literature by identifying middle level principals’ practices of parent involvement. This chapter presents the study’s findings.

Principals’ practices of parent involvement vary greatly. In order to focus this study, Epstein’s (1995) typology, which identifies six categories of parent involvement, was used. The six categories in Epstein’s typology include: parenting, communicating, volunteering, learning at home, decision making, and collaborating with the community. An existing survey, the Measure

of School Family and Community Partnership (Epstein et al., 2002), was adapted for this study and used with middle level principals.

An online survey was used to collect data on middle level principals’ practices of parent involvement. This chapter is organized to provide context based on participants’ responses to the three research questions:

1. To what extent do middle level principals’ parent involvement practices compare to Epstein’s exemplary practices in the typology?

2. To what extent do middle level principals’ parent involvement practices align to

Epsteins’s six parent involvement categories: parenting, communicating, volunteering, learning at home, decision-making, and collaborating with community?

3. How do middle level principals parent involvement practices vary by years of experience, years leading at current school, gender, percentage of free and/or reduced meals within the school student population, and the geographical location of the school?

4.2 PARTICIPANTS

Data were collected through an online survey, Qualtrics. The Pennsylvania Association for Middle Level Educators (PAMLE) supported this study, and middle level principals leading a school in the organization’s Western Region were invited to respond to the survey. The Western Region includes the southwest corner of the state of Pennsylvania including Allegheny, Beaver, Greene, and Washington counties, and middle level principals in the outer borders of Lawrence,

who range in age from 10-15 were included in the sample. Principals leading a junior/senior high school or leading a school including grade 4 were not included. To gain a more robust sampling, middle level principals who work in a district who are members of Tri-State Area School Study Council were also included in the sampling. Tri-State Area School Study Council helps leaders stay focused on the rapidly changing administrative, legal, and instructional issues